Developer Diary, Part 166 - Discussion

Recommended Posts

Really looking forward to Career Mode - it's basically what I bought Il2-BoX for. Hoping for good, dynamic front with missions related to it. Ace encounters would be cool. Most importantly, I hope it's a well thought out and polished system. It would give purpose for me and presumably others to all the great high fidelity stuff they've done for the last five years.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

That is seriously awesome. We definitely need player controllable ships and AA guns. I agree with Sinned that would definitely be well worth the time wasted.

Those poor devs sometimes have to wonder I suppose. All of the great information shared with us in this DD, regarding the upcoming update that will include all this great stuff - not to mention the Kuban map. And we continue to ask for yet more...

I am not sure they would consider that worth their valuable time. I know they added some player controllable tanks, yet I rarely see any discussion of this type of play in here.

I certainly am not against it, even though I myself would not use it. I have this sim for the air combat alone for myself.

But a lean and mean team might be hard pressed to expand the franchise to player controlled everything.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Those poor devs sometimes have to wonder I suppose. All of the great information shared with us in this DD, regarding the upcoming update that will include all this great stuff - not to mention the Kuban map. And we continue to ask for yet more...

I am not sure they would consider that worth their valuable time. I know they added some player controllable tanks, yet I rarely see any discussion of this type of play in here.

I certainly am not against it, even though I myself would not use it. I have this sim for the air combat alone for myself.

But a lean and mean team might be hard pressed to expand the franchise to player controlled everything.

I feel bad for the producers and devs every time I read comments. It's all about asking for more and more, and fix this and I don't like that.

This community does not appreciate the effort, constraints or feasibility of most requests.

5

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I've thought about this and been a part of many many gaming communities. The entire flow of this is very familiar where the devs offer up details and the community offers up a hundred more ways to play on top of the already impressive stuff that the devs are already offering.

I think, though I don't know for certain, that most developers are familiar with this flow and are somewhat insulated from the negative effects (though never fully) and are able to appreciate the positives in terms of the immense brainstorming power that the community can offer. We've seen time and time again 1CGS offer up gameplay and graphics tweaks and options that have been suggested. There has to be a connection between something the community wants and the time/available effort/available research materials available to make good on doing it. Sometimes it takes longer or its not possible but it was great to think about it anyways.

The developers have challenges and restrictions on what they can do (it doesn't matter if its a triple A high budget game or a small developer trying to crank out a flight sim) and what they can do in what order so not every issue that we each personally have at the top of the list is going to be reached in order. As long as we as a community know that and as long as the devs interpret the positive responses for more of everything as genuine excitement (and in many cases that's all it is) then I think we're ok.

Again, the last few developer updates have continued what I've observed to be a long standing trend where 1CGS has consistently communicated what they are working on, what they are doing, what the challenges are and really kept that community interaction going. It can be frayed by certain individuals but I know many are just enjoying the flow of information and in some cases the drool worthy graphics and features they are dropping.

The Kuban map looks incredible. The campaign mode is a huge change to a longstanding issue that affects not just the current title in development but the entire series. The flight model update that is coming has big impacts to all three titles and should make for an even more realistic and accurate experience and hopefully fix a few bugaboos with aircraft handling along the way. We've already got DX11, AI optimizations, VR, new shadows, and so much more. That's not even mentioning new flyable aircraft content like the Spitfire.

Things look incredibly bright from my perspective. Even if I chime in sometimes and wistfully say "Wouldn't it be great if...." That's just part of the enjoyment for me.

Edited July 29, 2017 by ShamrockOneFive

8

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There is an unrealistic expectation from a lot of people about what they can deliver. As ShamrockOneFive saysthey have already delivered incredibly in the last year. The pace and quality of improvement is phenomenal.

They have also shown themselves to be competent and hard-headed where necessary in sticking to what is achievable and refusing to deviate from what is most important. The one occasion where they have deviated is the Ju52, and that provides an object lesson in the slippery slope that can ensue and the absolute insatiability of many of the wants on the forum:

There was an outcry from some when the Ju52 wasn't included in BOS (though presumably the people who complained wouldn't have wanted it at the expense of doing without the He111). After time they brought it in as an AI-only plane, which satisfied people for 10 minutes, before demands started for it to be flyable......then when it was announced it would be made flyable the demand was for paratroops and supply drops.

Amazingly they did it all and did it well....only for the next demand/request to materialise.......that now it was really important (and only fair) to have a DC3!

And meanwhile there are regular requests for extra aircraft between BOM/Pacific - the Hurricane, 109G-6, La5f, and a myriad of others...and oh yes, why not throw in player-controlled boats as well......

People need to get real. Or at least ask themselves what they are personally prepared to do without from the already-announced plans in order to fit in these new desires and 'cool' features.

Fortunately I believe the devs will continue as they have in sticking to what is achievable and what is most important for the future success of the sim, and that means most of these requests will be non-starters.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

My trigger finger is itching to kill those boats! I told my squad we will reconvene as soon as Kuban is released! We are all eager to unleash hell!

I thoroughly enjoyed my work creating unit emblems. I believe I did over 40+. It was hard researching because I do not speak German but very rewarding. Sometimes I just stumbled upon them by complete accident. And the resources at the Luftwaffe Experten Message Board are invaluable. I am so thankful I still have access.

Until then gentlemen I will see you in the skies soon!

Thanks so much for your great contribution to the sim. Looking forward to seeing your emblems in-game!

I guess I am not the only one looking forward to attacking those boats from the air, walking tracers up to their speeding hulls. Will be quite the challenge I think! - It would be cool if some semi-randomized zigzagging is implemented the moment enemy fighters appear on the horizon. Now that would be a challenge!

Also re-enacting the famous Stuka Flakvogel attacks on shipping in the Kuban theatre will be awesome.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Those poor devs sometimes have to wonder I suppose. All of the great information shared with us in this DD, regarding the upcoming update that will include all this great stuff - not to mention the Kuban map. And we continue to ask for yet more...

I am not sure they would consider that worth their valuable time. I know they added some player controllable tanks, yet I rarely see any discussion of this type of play in here.

I certainly am not against it, even though I myself would not use it. I have this sim for the air combat alone for myself.

But a lean and mean team might be hard pressed to expand the franchise to player controlled everything.

I have to disagree. Almost every post asking or even hoping to see the boats as controllable has also been enthusiastic in their reply to the DD. Honestly, what harm is there in asking for more? I didn't see any serious demands made. If anything, I think it shows a desire to invest more in this series. I can't make myself believe anyone's feelings are hurt by such replies.

5

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There is an unrealistic expectation from a lot of people about what they can deliver. As ShamrockOneFive saysthey have already delivered incredibly in the last year. The pace and quality of improvement is phenomenal.

They have also shown themselves to be competent and hard-headed where necessary in sticking to what is achievable and refusing to deviate from what is most important. The one occasion where they have deviated is the Ju52, and that provides an object lesson in the slippery slope that can ensue and the absolute insatiability of many of the wants on the forum:

There was an outcry from some when the Ju52 wasn't included in BOS (though presumably the people who complained wouldn't have wanted it at the expense of doing without the He111). After time they brought it in as an AI-only plane, which satisfied people for 10 minutes, before demands started for it to be flyable......then when it was announced it would be made flyable the demand was for paratroops and supply drops.

Amazingly they did it all and did it well....only for the next demand/request to materialise.......that now it was really important (and only fair) to have a DC3!

And meanwhile there are regular requests for extra aircraft between BOM/Pacific - the Hurricane, 109G-6, La5f, and a myriad of others...and oh yes, why not throw in player-controlled boats as well......

People need to get real. Or at least ask themselves what they are personally prepared to do without from the already-announced plans in order to fit in these new desires and 'cool' features.

Fortunately I believe the devs will continue as they have in sticking to what is achievable and what is most important for the future success of the sim, and that means most of these requests will be non-starters.

These are basically my thoughts regarding the Midway seaplane requests. While these were important aircraft in that battle, and would doubtless be very cool; My admittedly anecdotal experience leads me to believe these aircraft would be flown far less than a d4y judy, tbf avenger, or even possibly a b26 as collector planes. Don't go overboard on this seaplane stuff, and if you do them at all, make sure there is a good reason to fly them.

I want the devs to receive the maximum return on their time investment, and catering to every niche request just isn't realistic from a business perspective. Look at any other work in progress and see what happens to those who suffer from feature bloat.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Looking fantastic, the ships moved as realistic as one possible can hope for in rough wether. Not implying they should , but I wonder how torpedoes will act dropping them into this kind of wether. Will they be affected? if so that would be cool.

As said before, we have gotten a lot. Those giving critique in the early days have been forced to shut up and listen. I never believed the overall logistics and systems outside the planes themselves would be so immersive and huge.

Thank you

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

These are basically my thoughts regarding the Midway seaplane requests. While these were important aircraft in that battle, and would doubtless be very cool; My admittedly anecdotal experience leads me to believe these aircraft would be flown far less than a d4y judy, tbf avenger, or even possibly a b26 as collector planes. Don't go overboard on this seaplane stuff, and if you do them at all, make sure there is a good reason to fly them.

I want the devs to receive the maximum return on their time investment, and catering to every niche request just isn't realistic from a business perspective. Look at any other work in progress and see what happens to those who suffer from feature bloat.

Seaplanes for Midway actually might be a thing. Jason did ask for references on the F1M "Pete" seaplane in his call for resources (the others being the typical Zero, Kate and Val) so its something they are at least considering having.

As you say... there needs to be a good reason to fly them. If the gameplay is designed around them in the right way they will be just as compelling as other combat aircraft - maybe moreso for the offline audience than online. On the other hand I've made a case for them to be part of a scouting functionality that would be crucial for a type of fleet vs fleet setup in multiplayer complete with Air Marshal directing the scouting and subsequent fleet strikes.

1CGS is pretty good at setting out a plan and sticking to that plan. They threw the community a bone with the Ju52 which I appreciate. It's wonderful to have and lovingly put together. I really enjoy flying it but I know not all are enthralled. I'm sure the devs will stick to whatever their plan is.

I personally think there will be no controllable ships. Unless the community really wants it and the team has again some spare time.

So in the near future no speedboat racing in the Black Sea.

"Their spare time" is the key for everything. About whatever we asking for depends on their spare time and the worth the cost.

They did it once in their spare time for example the beautiful IL-2 MechWarrior model. Why not to surprise the community again with something???

I like the tanks addon and how the tanks are modeled in their current state. Even if this game is a flight sim not a tank sim it is still fun to see the action from a different perspective. About playable ships I was thinking about the 3rd perspective and using the same ship models already in-game???

.

If they have the spare time again, why not? If not, maybe someday...........................................to see again the action from a different perspective

Edited July 30, 2017 by Livai

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The think the developers have done a fantastic job up to now, and Kuban is looking excellent. I would love to have controllable boats and seaplanes, for Kuban and/or Midway, but I take whatever the devs can put together. They have done a good job balancing what the forum asks for and what they can do, and have always pushed the envelop. I have faith that we will get seaplanes by Midway. maybe we will not get them until after Kuban. Maybe we will never get them.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

So excited for the Career mode! The announcement of it was pretty much what sold me on BoS. I loved Rise of Flight's Career mode for how well-made it was. Each pilot had a name; the structure of getting a mission, taking off from your base to do the mission and encountering enemy recon, fighters, and bombers, and going back to your base; getting awards and promotions ... it's a great way to add flavor to the game, especially with all the units being present and a lot of them having their skins and history shown in-game.

Kuban's aircraft and scenery are looking great, so I'll probably jump into it at some point.

By the way, I read that the Career mode is planned to go into a beta in October. If so, will that only be for BoK or will it include BoS and BoM? Either way, it'll be a long wait for me. But worth it, I'm sure.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

By the way, I read that the Career mode is planned to go into a beta in October. If so, will that only be for BoK or will it include BoS and BoM? Either way, it'll be a long wait for me. But worth it, I'm sure.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Just had another look at the ship videos. The sea looks fantastic except... it's too shiny. Reflections on a calm sea are fine and dandy, but you don't get them when it's rough. The water is much too disturbed to give any kind of coherent reflection. I don't think that we can expect different sea surfaces for each weather condition in BoX, so perhaps the surface needs making a little bit les glassy so as to give a good overall look, no matter how calm or rough?

Cheers.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Hey Danil,great video with the Schnellboot.I almost felt like being there on the boat,water foam in my face.... untill I grabbed a can of cold beer from the fridge and it exploded into my face (did I shake that can too much earlier?)

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Hey Danil,great video with the Schnellboot.I almost felt like being there on the boat,water foam in my face.... untill I grabbed a can of cold beer from the fridge and it exploded into my face (did I shake that can too much earlier?)

Share on other sites

Sure you can do without several grass qualities, and even without insects. But I got the impression the developers are trying to make a realistic looking environment. The clouds, the water and shadows look quite good for a videogame anno 2017, but the rivers just don't match that overall quality. They look childish hand drawn and their curvature doesn't simulate the laws of physics like most elements within the game do.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Sure you can do without several grass qualities, and even without insects. But I got the impression the developers are trying to make a realistic looking environment. The clouds, the water and shadows look quite good for a videogame anno 2017, but the rivers just don't match that overall quality. They look childish hand drawn and their curvature doesn't simulate the laws of physics like most elements within the game do.

The rivers, especially as they become more shallow towards the shore and the coloration of the water changes and sand comes into view, are remarkable. Only other game I've seen that is Witcher 3. And for what it's worth, any time we're flying over one, my guys will comment on how good it looks.

As for the geography of the rivers, that's driven by the maps and data the devs have available to them, no?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The rivers, especially as they become more shallow towards the shore and the coloration of the water changes and sand comes into view, are remarkable. Only other game I've seen that is Witcher 3. And for what it's worth, any time we're flying over one, my guys will comment on how good it looks.

As for the geography of the rivers, that's driven by the maps and data the devs have available to them, no?

Compared to another game it might look good. In reality the inner curves of the river are shallowest and the outer curves of the river bed are deepest. Also the outer curves of the riverbank are steepest and smoothest. Vegetation emerges on the "sandy" inner riverbanks and is swallowed up from the outer banks.

Edited July 31, 2017 by Gatekeeper

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Compared to another game it might look good. In reality the inner curves of the river are shallowest and the outer curves of the river bed are deepest. Also the outer curves of the riverbank are steepest and smoothest. Vegetation is likely to grow on the inner riverbanks. So what exactly are your guys looking at?

Yes we need to develop a good river simulator.

2

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Just had another look at the ship videos. The sea looks fantastic except... it's too shiny. Reflections on a calm sea are fine and dandy, but you don't get them when it's rough. The water is much too disturbed to give any kind of coherent reflection. I don't think that we can expect different sea surfaces for each weather condition in BoX, so perhaps the surface needs making a little bit les glassy so as to give a good overall look, no matter how calm or rough?

Cheers.

Yeah - I noticed that too. It looks like something that maybe got carried over from RoF - the water there was pretty darn good, but the one knock I saw or heard most often was that it was too shiny/reflective. It would be nice if that could get toned down a bit, but I have no idea what may be causing it or what it might take to fix it. I have a feeling that it may be related to why the water also looks too silvery at times instead of being the darker green/blue it seems like it should be - perhaps it's reflecting too much of the light blue/white/gray tones from the sky?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I think we're doing alright if this is the extent of our gripes with the map.

Agreed! It's at a point where its so good that we can dive into some pretty deep details.

In the original IL-2 the river mostly just ended and land began. If you got close enough you could see that it was a series of hard edges along the sides of the river. Was pretty tough to be all that convincing there. The new technology blows it away in comparison.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Seaplanes for Midway actually might be a thing. Jason did ask for references on the F1M "Pete" seaplane in his call for resources (the others being the typical Zero, Kate and Val) so its something they are at least considering having.

As you say... there needs to be a good reason to fly them. If the gameplay is designed around them in the right way they will be just as compelling as other combat aircraft - maybe moreso for the offline audience than online. On the other hand I've made a case for them to be part of a scouting functionality that would be crucial for a type of fleet vs fleet setup in multiplayer complete with Air Marshal directing the scouting and subsequent fleet strikes.

1CGS is pretty good at setting out a plan and sticking to that plan. They threw the community a bone with the Ju52 which I appreciate. It's wonderful to have and lovingly put together. I really enjoy flying it but I know not all are enthralled. I'm sure the devs will stick to whatever their plan is.

If it weren't for Catalinas the Japanese carriers would not have been spotted despite Nimitz having a rough idea of where to look. If it weren't for mechanical failures and unfortunate timing the Japanese reconnaissance float-planes might have discovered the US fleet to the north much earlier resulting in a different outcome. Do not underestimate the importance of these aircraft in the PTO. The Japanese lacked radar on their surface fleet and the USN radar had short range. It was almost always the Catalinas (and subs) that provided the vital enemy bearing and disposition information on which Nimitz, Spruance and Halsey based their tactics. For people who care about realistic battles the seaplanes matter; more so if mission makers build the tactical need into their missions rather than ship YAAQM. I'm confident the development team have this in hand.

Edit: PS: The "do not underestimate ..." was not directed to Shamrock but at the nest quote which failed to copy.